Pharmco PIGS price point

PrintSmith wrote:

Something the Dog Said wrote: Do you have a single fact that supports your assertion that the pricing of the Solivad drug by Gilead is solely based on the cost of bringing that product to market? Nope, not a single fact.

Speaking of reading comprehension problems, it looks to me that the pot is calling a kettle black. I am not making that argument, in fact I am making an entirely different one; which is that the cost of Solvadi (I presume that is the drug you were talking about too) is based on much more than simply the cost of researching and producing it for sale, even though that seems to be all that others wish to consider when deciding that the $1K a pill price is outrageous. So are you having difficulty comprehending or are you intentionally distorting yet again?

And have all who are seeking to disparage Gilead for their pricing of this one drug been made aware of all of the facts or simply the ones fed to them in thier echo chambers which tell them to be outraged by the $1K per pill price? Were any of you aware of the following?

U.S. Patient Assistance Program

Gilead is committed to ensuring that people with hepatitis C can access Sovaldi and has launched Support Path™ ( http://www.MySupportPath.com ) to provide assistance to patients who are uninsured, underinsured or who need financial assistance to pay for the medicine. The program consists of an integrated offering of support services for patients and providers, including:

Access to dedicated case managers to help patients and their providers with insurance-related needs, including identifying alternative coverage options such as federally-insured programs (e.g., Medicaid, Medicare) and health exchanges.
Education and support, including a 24/7 nursing support service line and the ability to schedule an onsite visit from a clinical educator.
The Sovaldi Co-pay Coupon Program, which provides co-pay assistance for eligible patients with private insurance who need assistance paying for out-of-pocket medication costs. Most patients will pay no more than $5 per co-pay. Co-pay assistance can also be applied toward deductibles and co-insurance obligations.
Gilead will provide support to the Patient Access Network (PAN) Foundation, an independent non-profit organization that provides assistance for eligible federally-insured and privately-insured patients who need help covering out-of-pocket medication costs.
The Support Path Patient Assistance Program will provide Sovaldi at no charge for eligible patients with no other insurance options.
Information about how to apply for any of these forms of assistance can be found at http://www.MySupportPath.com or by calling 1-855-7MyPath (1-855-769-7284) between 9 a.m. - 8 p.m. EST.

- See more at: http://www.gilead.com/news/press-releas ... fpOsM.dpuf

So, in fact, it looks a lot like the same kind of cost shifting strategy being employed by the (un)Affordable Care Act is being employed here. Access to the drug is subsidized for those who meet certain guidelines by those who don't meet those guidelines. Isn't that supposed to be the way that health care is affordable for everyone according to the model preferred by the party of Democrats? They champion that system as being a good thing when they employ it and villify others who employ it. Good to see they are staying consistent in their hypocrisy. A company that is offering a lifesaving medicine for "free or at low cost" to those eligible so that all have access to a drug which can cure them of their disease and prevent them from having to undergo a liver transplant operation that costs $300K or more certainly sounds like a company whose sole motivating factor is greed to me. You are a tool Dog, a useful idiot who parrots talking points spoon fed to you in an echo chamber. You do nothing other than regurgitate something that a dog has said.

homeagain wrote: We get back to the ORIGINAL information......$1,000 Dollars A PILL is obnoxious and out of
line....GREED at it's utmost ugliness......JMO

Ditto for this nonsense in light of the facts which inform everyone that the company is committed to helping anyone who needs this drug to cure themselves of hep C obtain it even if that means providing it at no cost to someone who is financially unable to afford even a $5 a month co-pay for it. No cost to one is not the same as not cost to all, of course. Someone has to pay for that medicine, just as someone has to pay for the "free" annual check-up, "free" birth control, and all the other "free" goodies contained in the (un)Affordable Care Act.

Yet again, Printsmith fails to provide a single fact to support his assertions that the cost of Solvadi is solely due to the cost of development of the drug. Just more of his pedantic ramblings. Now apparently he is shifting away from his (incorrect) assertions and now claiming that the Democrats are somehow to blame and that I am a "tool" for actually providing factual information. Perhaps Printsmith should note the fine print in the "charitable" actions of the company. Their low cost treatments are only to those low income who are not covered under insurance. Thus the taxpayers are still on the hook for $84,000 treatments for Medicare/Medicaid/VA patients. The private insurers are on the hook for $84,000 treatments. Only those who would most likely forego payment through bankrupticies are elgible for their "charitable" actions.

Nothing like quoting directly from company press releases to show who the "tool" is. I note that Gilead fails to publicize what the qualifications for their "program" is.

It will be interesting when you can provide facts as to the actual details as to how many will be eligible for the "free" Solvadi, when you have facts as to what the actual costs are of Solvadi to Gilead, when you have facts about anything rather than just your usual pedantic ramblings.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/johnlamatti ... -industry/

So-o-o, IF I understand this forbes article....THIS drug release will FINANCIALLY position them
to springboard to OTHER profitable ventures (drugs)....BUT they had better take FAST AND
FULL advantage BEFORE the patent expires.....looks like $1,000 dollars a pill is a LUCRATIVE
price point for their FUTURE plans.....want to INVEST,CALL YOUR BROKER...... :coffee-News:

homeagain wrote: Rick....You are very correct that we come from much different approaches...I have given it
much thought about what I would do IF I had a severe condition.....for me, LESS is more.

Perhaps that is because I am 67 and my "view" reflects my desire for QUALITY over QUANTITY

I have been EXTREMELY fortunate to have enjoyed good health (for the most part). I have
inherited arthritis from my family tree and a vertigo issue that is bothersome at times....BUT,
I would consider myself in GOOD health in general.

From my POV, thru the years, I have made a CONSCIOUS effort to make informed and mindful
choices for myself (body)....I have taken a minimalist approach to drugs...meaning I generally
do NOT take medication. Yes, Advil or once or twice thru my life an antibiotic. At 67 years of
age I take HRT...a LO DO pill that I split in half.....that's it.

I have primary care physician (Functional Medicine) who believes that the staying away from
hospitals, clinics, doctors and DRUGS is the BEST thing you can do for your life.

THIS is an example of my mindset.....at one point my doctor (the above person) ABSOLUTELY
felt I needed Thyroid Meds (Synthroid).....my TSH level was thru the roof and she was adamant that it was necessary. BECAUSE she had my SAME mindset, I acquiesced and
took the meds......6 weeks of feeling like I was 85 years old (pretty sh**ty) I STEPPED DOWN
OFF the drug. (of course, by that time I had gained 10 lbs)....I did alot of RESEARCH within
that period of time and requested ADDITIONAL tests for my Free T3 and Free T4...THOSE
came back within range....rather than take main stream meds, I opted for ALTERNATIVE MED
approach...acupuncture, Chinese herbs and monitoring my blood work.....within several months
I was able to feel like myself again (STILL had the 10lbs extra on my frame,tho) I have since
done MORE research and have found Dr. Oz's article on two chemicals that are in household
products (anti-bacterial soap being one of them) and THOSE factors are exacerbating the
thyroid factor.....I am my OWN ADVOCATE for my health.....this is how I approach things.

Well we are all different and I never spent a day in the hospital until I got cancer at 48 yrs old. I never even take aspirin, but when you find out you have a tumor the size of a softball and a simultaneous tumor in your kidney, you may think differently about the less is more approach. Being your own "advocate" will do you little good when stage 4 cancer makes a surprise visit and you realize your time clock is about to run out. Believe me, you will want whatever drug it takes to stop it's progress as fast as possible.

Rick...a HEARTFELT handshake to you....I UNDERSTAND that genetics are something you have NO
control over and it's a crapshoot when you are given that genetic information....lose some and
win some.....what I am trying to convey is this....when you are NOT dealing with a genetic issue
and the issue is NOT life threatening....be VERY conservative with treatment/drugs/doctors
recommendations....do the research and THEN make an informed decision about your health....JMO

homeagain wrote: Rick...a HEARTFELT handshake to you....I UNDERSTAND that genetics are something you have NO
control over and it's a crapshoot when you are given that genetic information....lose some and
win some.....what I am trying to convey is this....when you are NOT dealing with a genetic issue
and the issue is NOT life threatening....be VERY conservative with treatment/drugs/doctors
recommendations....do the research and THEN make an informed decision about your health....JMO

Good points HA, and just because I have this gene mutation, it doesn't mean I can't help to prevent the return of cancer. It's amazing how much of a health motivator chemo can be if you can get through it.

Got suddenly QUIET after the Forbes FINANCIAL prediction.....didn't it?

Gilead spent $11 Billion to acquire the patent on the compound that cures Hep C across 4 genotypes, two of which present treatments have little to no chance of curing, and it is the only product in the market which accomplishes that feat. The other Hep C treatments require interferon, administered via injections 1 to 3 times a week, for 6 months to a year and a daily dose of another drug. That is a treatment that many of those afflicted with the disease are unwilling to subject themselves to or incapable of tolerating and even those that can put up with the horrid side effects have roughly a 40% chance of being cured. For the other 60% of the patients who undergo 6 months to a year of nausea, reduced white, red and platelet cell counts, depression (requiring treatment with another drug in some instances), fatigue, muscle and joint pain and all the rest of the side effects, all they have to look forward to is cirrohis of their liver that will eventually destroy it and kill them if surgery to remove the damaged area isn't successful (what do you suppose the cost of that is?), a transplant, costing $300K or more, can't be found, or contracting liver cancer and having to be treated for that through ablation or traditional chemo/radiation regimes. What is the cost of all that treatment which can be eliminated, not to mention the pain and suffering home? Any bets that it is more than the cost of curing the disease with a pill that is taken once a day for 12 weeks even if the 84 pills cost $1K each?

Well, ain't this wonderful. Our pharmaceutical industry here in the U.S. comes up with a Jim Dandy medicine to cure a disease and all the liberals can do is bitch because it is not free. We should be shouting about how America is great, but no.

Liberals..........ya gotta luv em.

Arlen.....NO ONE mentioned free....what WAS brought forward was the exorbitant expectation
of $1,000 a pill.....

Exhorbitant to whom home, you? That you have decided the price is exhorbitant doesn't establish that it is. When compared to the total costs of other treatments currently available, taking into consideration the cure rate versus those other treatments, $1K a pill can easily be a cost saving measure. That you refuse to acknowledge this salient point is troublesome.

And so I will ask again. What is the cost of treating the disease via existing measures when you look at the total costs when you factor in the reality that for 60% of those afflicted with the disease you are looking at liver surgery, or liver replacement, or treatment for liver cancers? How much time is lost from the person being productive in the society to receive those treatments with such horrific side effects and what is the cost associated with the lost production?

One can't simply look at a single factor and make a reasoned determination that the cost is "exhorbitant". Your unwillingness to look at the complete picture is very clear at this point and highly indicative that you are unwilling to look at facts which don't fall in line with your predetermined conclusions.